Mel Stride: I thank the hon. Lady for that helpful and informative intervention. I am grateful and pay tribute to Buckingham Orchard Residents and Community in my constituency, which has done a great deal and fought hard to improve conditions on its site. I shall certainly take the hon. Lady's suggestion of a forum and such activity to that association to see whether it might benefit from that.
	Finally, dispute resolution at the moment typically means going through the county courts, and doing so not just at great expense, but often in the face of numerous delays, because unscrupulous site owners are adept at stringing things out and making things difficult at every turn. We have all heard the stories in which site owners fail to turn up, give a reason and there has to be a re-hearing. They just wear people out, which is why I particularly welcome the Government's commitment to a residential property tribunal. However, it is absolutely essential that such a tribunal is quick to deal with grievances, that there is a minimum of delay involved and that it is not expensive to use. On 14 July, in referring to residential property tribunals, the Minister for Housing stated:
	"This will mean that park home residents will be able to take action to resolve disputes with site owners, without being restricted by the prospect of facing large legal costs."-[ Official Report, 14 July 2010; Vol. 513, c. 28WS.]
	That is absolutely critical. We are dealing with people who are among the least advantaged in our society and cost must be driven down to give them a route to justice.
	We should also toughen up on fines and give the tribunal real teeth. At the moment, a breach of a site licence carries a maximum fine of £2,500. In many cases, that is simply not enough to deter the kind of activity that we have been debating this afternoon. I urge the Minister to consider whether there should be an escalation of fines for repeat offences, because we are aware that some site owners do the same things over and over again. Those people should be penalised more heavily each time around.
	Many of the things I have raised and that other hon. Members have touched upon may not be achieved simply through secondary legislation. We may need primary legislation. I hope that the Government and the Minister have the political will to ensure that the time required to push forward these changes is made available. We need to act to remove the last refuge of Rachmanism in this country, because that is what we are dealing with; we need to act to stand up for the vulnerable and the elderly who suffer in the circumstances that I and many others have described; and we need to act for the many self-reliant, proud and decent park home residents, who ask nothing more than that they are treated with fairness, dignity and respect.